No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
According to a strict interpretation of the international rules of zoological nomenclature the generic name Spirifer is wrongly used for the group including Anomites striatus, Martin, and should be restricted to the group including Anomites cuspidatus, Martin, i.e. it should replace Syringothyris, Winchell. My object in pointing this out is not to urge a strict interpretation of the international rules in this case, for it would serve no useful purpose to attempt to displace a name which through a century of usage has become the geological equivalent of a household word, but to show the need for geologists to combine with zoologists in demanding a list of nomina conservanda in zoology.
page 372 note 1 Fide Dall, W. H., “Index to the Names which have been applied to the Subdivisions of the Class Brachiopoda”: Bull. U.S. Mus., No. 8, 1877, p. 63.Google ScholarNorth, F. J. (“On the Genus Syringothyris, Winchell”: Geol. Mag., Dec. V, Vol. X, pp. 393–401, 1913) gives the date of publication as 1818. I have not access to the publication in question, but all authors agree that it was published subsequently to Min. Conch., vol. ii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 372 note 2 Loc. cit.
page 372 note 3 “Opinions rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.” Opinions 30–7. SmithsonianIn stitution, Publication 2013, 1911, pp. 69–72.Google Scholar
page 373 note 1 Lydekker, R., Cat. Foss. Rept. Brit. Mus., pt. ii, 1881, p. vii.Google Scholar